WHO ARE THE HUNS?

50 Violation of Congo

50 Violation of Congo Acts. Colonial War. Article 10 stipulates that in order to obtain a new security for trade and industry and to ensure the preservation of peace and the furtherance of civilization in the lands in question, the contracting powers pledge themselves to respect this neutrality, "so long as the powers which exercise rights of sovereignty and protection over this district make use of the right to declare themselves neutral, and to fulfil the obligations of neutrality." This purely theoretical declaration of neutrality is then succeeded by its practical interpretation in Articles n and 12. In case of one of the powers being involved in war as laid down in Article 10, the other signatories pledge themselves to use their best efforts to the end that the territory of this power which may be included in the Free Trade zone, in accordance with, the common agreement of this power and the other party or parties among the belligerent signatories, is to be placed under the laws of neutrality for the duration of the war, and is to be regarded as though belonging to a non-belligerent power. The belligerent parties would therefore be called upon from this date onward, to refrain from extending their hostilities to the neutralized territories, and from using these as a basis for warlike operations. In cases of serious differences of opinion, the signatory powers promise to avail themselves of the mediation of one or more friendly powers ere making use of the force of arms. A procedure based upon courts of arbitration is provided for. The purpose of these provisions of the Congo Convention is beyond doubt, and for obvious reasons is based upon a desire to avoid the possibility of an eventual war between the Great Powers from affecting the "Congo district," as under the protection of the Congo Convention. The powers which were to fulfil the function of mediators would naturally be those which were not involved in the war, yet were signatories of the Agreement, that is to say, Denmark, Spain, the United States of America, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway. The blame for the non-compliance with the Congo Acts is not to be ascribed to these neutral states, but to those which hungered to achieve swift and cheap victories on African soil, and immediately began hostilities in neutralized

Violation of Congo Acts. Colonial War. 51 territory after a gross violation of the pledges they had made—that is, England and Belgium—both signatories to the Convention "in the Name of Almighty God!" England, as may easily be proved, at once began to conduct an aggressive war against Germany in East Africa, and it is therefore upon her head that the fearful responsibility must fall for the consequences which the subjugated peoples will inevitably derive from the actions of a so-called civilized Great Power. 1 For the charge made in the first German edition of this work—to the effect that England alone was to be charged with this abominable blood-guilt and with the betrayal of the race, has now been conclusively proved by the publication of the Belgian Grey Book and the German memorial mentioned in the foregoing. In No. 57 Belgium expresses the hope that the war would not be extended to Central Africa. France at first appears to be in agreement with this. (No. 59 and 61.) France requests Spain to propose an agreement based upon the Congo Acts of neutralization. (Grey Book, No. 61.) England thereupon declared that it could not agree to this (see No. 75), and France naturally follows this lead (No. 74 and 75), withdrawing its proposal to Spain, which could do nothing without the consent of England. Secretary of State Solf is therefore entirely in the right in declaring, in an interview, that England, France and Belgium are alone responsible for setting Africa ablaze with the war. At the beginning of August, some days after the outbreak of war on the continent and shortly before the declaration of war by England, the Paris newspapers printed a despatch dated London, the impressive tone of which plainly bespoke its official origin. The British Government,—according to 1 ) See also the declarations made on the 15th of December, 1885, by the representative of the United States of America, Mr. Kasson, who prophetically describes the effect which would follow upon a breach of the neutralization of the Congo. See the "Koloniale Rundschau," 1914, page 454, as well as the revelations of the Mr. E. D. Morel in the August number of the "African Mail" (reprinted in "The Catholic," a Swiss paper) in which this gentleman utters a warning as to the terrible consequences that would follow the extension of the war to these districts. 4*